Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2020; 68(05): 410-416
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1668496
Original Cardiovascular
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Bilateral Paravertebral Block versus Thoracic Epidural Analgesia for Pain Control Post-Cardiac Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Hatem A. El Shora
1   Anesthesia and Surgical ICU Department, Faculty of Medicine-Tanta University, Tanta, Gharbeya, Egypt
,
Ahmed A. El Beleehy
1   Anesthesia and Surgical ICU Department, Faculty of Medicine-Tanta University, Tanta, Gharbeya, Egypt
,
Amr A. Abdelwahab
2   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine-Tanta University, Tanta, Gharbeya, Egypt
,
Gaser A. Ali
3   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine- Zagazig University, Zagazig, Sharkia, Egypt
,
Tarek E. Omran
2   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine-Tanta University, Tanta, Gharbeya, Egypt
,
Essam A. Hassan
2   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine-Tanta University, Tanta, Gharbeya, Egypt
,
Amr A. Arafat
2   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine-Tanta University, Tanta, Gharbeya, Egypt
› Author Affiliations
Fund None. The pain management represents the standard of care in the participating centers.

Trial Registration Number PACTR201603001502110 (www.pactr.org).
Further Information

Publication History

02 March 2018

05 July 2018

Publication Date:
16 August 2018 (online)

Abstract

Background Adequate pain control after cardiac surgery is essential. Paravertebral block is a simple technique and avoids the potential complications of epidural catheters. The objective of this study is to compare the effect of ultrasound-guided bilateral thoracic paravertebral block with thoracic epidural block on pain control after cardiac surgery.

Materials and Methods Between March 2016 and 2017, 145 patients who had cardiac surgery through median sternotomy were randomized by stratified blocked randomization into two groups. Group I (n = 70 patients) had bilateral ultrasound-guided thoracic paravertebral block and Group II (n = 75 patients) had thoracic epidural analgesia. The primary end point was the postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS). The duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU), and hospital stay were the secondary end points. The study design is a randomized parallel superiority clinical trial.

Results Both groups had similar preoperative and operative characteristics. No significant difference in VAS measured immediately after endotracheal extubation then after 12, 24, and 48 hours between groups (p = 0.45). Pain score significantly declined with the repeated measures (p < 0.001) and the decline was not related to the treatment group. Postoperative pain was significantly related to diabetes mellitus (p = 0.039). Six patients in group I (8.5%) required an additional dose of morphine versus three patients (4%) in group II (p = 0.30). Patients in group I had significantly shorter ICU stay (p = 0.005) and lower incidence of urinary retention (p = 0.04) and vomiting (p = 0.018). No difference was found in operative complications between groups.

Conclusion This randomized parallel controlled trial demonstrates that ultrasound-guided paravertebral block is safe and effective method for relieving post-cardiac surgery sternotomy pain compared with thoracic epidural analgesia but not superior to it.

Author Contribution

Hatem A. El Shora: study design and trial registration, supervised data collection and coordinated work between the participating centers, wrote the first manuscript, critically revised and approved the final manuscript. Moreover, he modified the manuscript in response to the reviewer's comments. Ahmed A. El Beleehy: participated in study design and was responsible for the administrative work for local trial registration and getting Ethical Committee approval, performed literature review, drafted the manuscript, revised and approved the final manuscript. Amr A. Abdelwahab: data acquisition in center 1, shared in final interpretation of the statistical analysis, critically revised the first draft, revised and approved the final manuscript. Gaser Ali: collected data in center 2, supervised the initial statistical analysis and data interpretation, critically revised the first and final manuscript. Tarek E. Omran: collected data from center 1, revised the collected data and ascertained the consistency and accuracy of the collected data from both centers, critically revised the draft and final manuscript. Essam A. Hassan: supervised patient's enrollment, consent and flow of the study, revised and interpreted the results of the statistical analysis, critically revised the first draft and approved the final draft. Moreover, he drafted the response to the reviewers. Amr A. Arafat: participated in the study design and sample size calculation, revised the statistical analysis, performed additional statistical tests and made the final interpretation of the data, revised the first draft and wrote the final version of the manuscript.


 
  • References

  • 1 Bjørnnes AK, Parry M, Lie I. , et al. The impact of an educational pain management booklet intervention on postoperative pain control after cardiac surgery. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2017; 16 (01) 18-27
  • 2 Fibla JJ, Molins L, Mier JM, Sierra A, Vidal G. Comparative analysis of analgesic quality in the postoperative of thoracotomy: paravertebral block with bupivacaine 0.5% vs ropivacaine 0.2%. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2008; 33 (03) 430-434
  • 3 Raksamani K, Wongkornrat W, Siriboon P, Pantisawat N. Pain management after cardiac surgery: are we underestimating post sternotomy pain?. J Med Assoc Thai 2013; 96 (07) 824-828
  • 4 Hansdottir V, Philip J, Olsen MF, Eduard C, Houltz E, Ricksten SE. Thoracic epidural versus intravenous patient-controlled analgesia after cardiac surgery: a randomized controlled trial on length of hospital stay and patient-perceived quality of recovery. Anesthesiology 2006; 104 (01) 142-151
  • 5 Raveglia F, Rizzi A, Leporati A, Di Mauro P, Cioffi U, Baisi A. Analgesia in patients undergoing thoracotomy: epidural versus paravertebral technique. A randomized, double-blind, prospective study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 147 (01) 469-473
  • 6 Scarfe AJ, Schuhmann-Hingel S, Duncan JK, Ma N, Atukorale YN, Cameron AL. Continuous paravertebral block for post-cardiothoracic surgery analgesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2016; 50 (06) 1010-1018
  • 7 Abo Elnasr M, Arafat AA, Abdel Wahab A, Taha A-HM. Intercostal versus subxiphoid approach for pleural drainage post coronary artery bypass grafting. J Egypt Soc Cardiothorac Surg 2017; 25 (01) 8-13
  • 8 Choinière M, Watt-Watson J, Victor JC. , et al. Prevalence of and risk factors for persistent postoperative nonanginal pain after cardiac surgery: a 2-year prospective multicentre study. CMAJ 2014; 186 (07) E213-E223
  • 9 Marcassa C, Faggiano P, Greco C, Ambrosetti M, Temporelli PL. ; Italian Association of Cardiovascular Prevention, Rehabilitation (GICR-IACPR). A retrospective multicenter study on long-term prevalence of chronic pain after cardiac surgery. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown) 2015; 16 (11) 768-774
  • 10 Bigeleisen PE, Goehner N. Novel approaches in pain management in cardiac surgery. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2015; 28 (01) 89-94
  • 11 Hotta K, Endo T, Taira K. , et al. Comparison of the analgesic effects of continuous extrapleural block and continuous epidural block after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2011; 25 (06) 1009-1013
  • 12 Pintaric TS, Potocnik I, Hadzic A, Stupnik T, Pintaric M, Novak Jankovic V. Comparison of continuous thoracic epidural with paravertebral block on perioperative analgesia and hemodynamic stability in patients having open lung surgery. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2011; 36 (03) 256-260
  • 13 Kosiński S, Fryźlewicz E, Wiłkojć M, Ćmiel A, Zieliński M. Comparison of continuous epidural block and continuous paravertebral block in postoperative analgaesia after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy: a randomised, non-inferiority trial. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther 2016; 48 (05) 280-287
  • 14 Marhofer P, Kettner SC, Hajbok L, Dubsky P, Fleischmann E. Lateral ultrasound-guided paravertebral blockade: an anatomical-based description of a new technique. Br J Anaesth 2010; 105 (04) 526-532
  • 15 Richardson J, Lönnqvist PA. Thoracic paravertebral block. Br J Anaesth 1998; 81 (02) 230-238
  • 16 Olivier JF, Bracco D, Nguyen P, Le N, Noiseux N, Hemmerling T. ; Perioperative Cardiac Surgery Research Group (PeriCARG). A novel approach for pain management in cardiac surgery via median sternotomy: bilateral single-shot paravertebral blocks. Heart Surg Forum 2007; 10 (05) E357-E362
  • 17 Dhole S, Mehta Y, Saxena H, Juneja R, Trehan N. Comparison of continuous thoracic epidural and paravertebral blocks for postoperative analgesia after minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2001; 15 (03) 288-292
  • 18 Mehta Y, Arora D, Sharma KK, Mishra Y, Wasir H, Trehan N. Comparison of continuous thoracic epidural and paravertebral block for postoperative analgesia after robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass surgery. Ann Card Anaesth 2008; 11 (02) 91-96
  • 19 Chakravarthy M, Thimmangowda P, Krishnamurthy J, Nadiminti S, Jawali V. Thoracic epidural anesthesia in cardiac surgical patients: a prospective audit of 2,113 cases. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2005; 19 (01) 44-48
  • 20 Owens EL, Kasten GW, Hessel II EA. Spinal subarachnoid hematoma after lumbar puncture and heparinization: a case report, review of the literature, and discussion of anesthetic implications. Anesth Analg 1986; 65 (11) 1201-1207